It is a historical feature of Irish republicanism that rival factions
have vied for the status of legitimate claimants to the republican
mantle, utilising republican icons both from the living and deceased in
pursuit of that objective.

Mainstream republicans lost the support of War of Independence veteran
Tom Maguire once abstentionism was settled within Sinn Fein;
subsequently, Joe Cahill assumed the status of the senior living
republican icon until his death.

The association of one prominent member of the Sands family with a
dissident republican outfit in the early peace process era was regarded
as a coup by the overly-optimistic dissidents who believed - prior to
the Omagh bombing - that they were laying the foundations for a return
to war.

But the 1981 hunger strikers have been afforded an iconic status amongst
republicans of the present generation due to the enduring legacy of
self-sacrifice associated with their actions.

It is, therefore, perhaps inevitable that allegations concerning Sinn
Fein president Gerry Adams’ role during the hunger strike period should
not only have surfaced, but have been so eagerly welcomed by disaffected
- and dissident - republicans in recent times.

Richard O’Rawe’s narrative is constructed around the central theme that
Gerry Adams wilfully dismissed the lives of fellow republicans simply to
gain electoral support for Sinn Fein. It is a convenient narrative for
dissident republicans and hence the decision of the more vocal amongst
their numbers to adopt O’Rawe’s cause - nowhere more so than in the
blogosphere, where arguments have raged on local political websites for
years.

It is wholly unsurprising that the Sinn Fein president has spurned
opportunities to respond publicly to Richard O’Rawe; Adams is
sufficiently long in the political tooth to avoid falling into a trap
from which only his antagonist would benefit from having his stature
uplifted through such an encounter.

What is missing from O’Rawe’s narrative is a reasonable explanation for
the alleged behaviour of Adams. Observing the plight of his comrades in
prison, why would he so recklessly dismiss their lives? Suggestions that
the motivation was the prospect of electoral advances are extremely
dubious.

How could Gerry Adams have known what mileage there was in the electoral
route for republicans?

All evidence points to the fact that, while republican leaders were keen
on broadening their battlefield and maximising the potential to garner
the legitimacy proffered by an electoral mandate, the same republican
leaders clearly believed that the British Government would be forced
from Ireland by military means and not by electoral victories.

Brighton, the Libyan shipments, the European and England campaigns that
followed Sinn Fein’s electoral foray through the 1980s, all indicate
clearly that an Adams-led republican movement was nowhere near
concluding that an electoral path would ultimately provide the only
long-term future for the republican struggle.

It stretches credibility to believe that Adams was willing to sacrifice
the lives of of his colleagues to ensure the re-election of a republican
candidate in Fermanagh South Tyrone.

O’Rawe’s arguments have been countered repeatedly by Danny Morrison and
others more centrally involved in the prison discussions at the time in
what has become a seemingly endless bout of bickering which has led many
families of the deceased hunger strikers to request an end to the
dispute.

Alas, it would appear that their collective calls are destined to fall
on deaf ears for some time to come.

We have a favour to ask

We want to keep our publication as available as we can, so we need to ask for your help. Irish Republican News takes time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe it makes a difference.
If everyone who reads our website helps fund it, our future would be much more secure.

For as little as £1, you can support Irish Republican News – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.